Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!news.iecc.com!.POSTED.news.iecc.com!nerds-end
From: Derek <derek-nospam@shape-of-code.com>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Subject: Re: Compilation Quotient (CQ): A Metric for the Compilation Hardness of Programming Languages
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:30:37 +0100
Organization: Compilers Central
Sender: johnl%iecc.com
Approved: comp.compilers@iecc.com
Message-ID: <24-06-006@comp.compilers>
References: <24-06-003@comp.compilers>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Injection-Info: gal.iecc.com; posting-host="news.iecc.com:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970"; logging-data="99369"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@iecc.com"
Keywords: parse, practice
Posted-Date: 10 Jun 2024 16:43:26 EDT
X-submission-address: compilers@iecc.com
X-moderator-address: compilers-request@iecc.com
X-FAQ-and-archives: http://compilers.iecc.com
In-Reply-To: <24-06-003@comp.compilers>
Xref: csiph.com comp.compilers:3574

John,

> This preprint from TU Delft and ETH Zurich generates small programs from
> the grammars of several popular programs, and calculates CQ, which is
> roughly the percentage (0-100) that compile, intended as a proxy for how
> hard the languages are to write.  C has a CQ of 48, Rust barely above
> zero.

The paper
Programming Languages vs. Fat Fingers
https://www2.dmst.aueb.gr/dds/blog/20121205/index.html

made small changes to existing code, in various languages,
and then measured how many compiled, ran and produced
the correct output.